Walking the Stations of the Cross with her 7-year old son

Miranda Hassett, Rector of St. Dunstan’s in Madison has a lovely, thoughtful post on her son’s participation in a recent Stations of the Cross. It’s here.

What did G do, while we were going around and reading the Stations? He stood with us -sometimes relatively still, sometimes hopping from foot to foot. Sometimes reading along in his booklet, sometimes flopping his booklet back and forth, sometimes holding his booklet over his face with just his eyes peering over. He wandered off and sat down on a chair, a rocker, the floor. He drew a cross in red marker on one page of the booklet. He gazed at the art. He breathed on the glass of the windows and drew crosses in the water vapor with his finger. He fell over, once. He peered into the faces of the two adults in the room, to try to figure out what we were thinking and feeling. Sometimes he read the responses with us; sometimes he missed them.

And – I know this because I’m his mom, and because at least half my attention was on him the whole time – he was tuned in, listening, taking it in and thinking about it, the whole time. He was wiggly and distracting and all over the place, but he was, in his 7-going-on-8 way, fully present. And, as I started to read Station 7, he said, “I’ll read the next one.” He read Station 8 and Station 10. He declined to read again, but the other adult encouraged him to read the last one, and he did. He read most of it from a seated position astride our (heavy, stone) altar rail.

She goes on to reflect on the inclusion of kids in worship. Read it.

Next Monday (the 25th), there will be a Stations of the Cross as a Witness against Violence (part of a nation-wide effort of the Episcopal Church) at St. Dunstan’s at 6:00 pm. More info here.

Jesus, Remember me: Lectionary Reflections for Palm Sunday, Year C

This week’s readings are here.

We have slowly been gaining insight into Luke’s understanding of Jesus these past few months–slowly because our gospel readings have jumped around in Luke and have also included readings from the Gospel of John. Among the most important texts for Luke’s understanding of Jesus is his teaching in the synagogue at Nazareth (Lk 4:17:21, read on the 3rd Sunday after the Epiphany). There Jesus announces the fulfillment of the prophecy of the recovery of sight for the blind, that prisoners will be set free, and the poor will have the good news preached to them. Over the following weeks, we saw some of that activity. In the Parable of the Prodigal Son, we also saw the promise of forgiveness from a loving God.

It may be that it is only now, in the crucifixion scene, that many churchgoers will encounter central aspects of Luke’s image of Jesus. His prayer for forgiveness as he is crucified is a prayer that God will forgive his executioners whether or not they repent of their actions. In fact, Jesus says that “they know not what they do.” Jesus responds similarly to the plea of the second criminal, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” Here, the criminal doesn’t ask for forgiveness but Jesus extends his forgiveness nonetheless: “Today you will be with me in Paradise.”

In Luke Jesus is crucified not to pay for the sins of humanity. He is crucified because the Roman Empire and its Jewish collaborators have chosen to execute him. The charges brought against him are political: perverting our nation,telling people no to pay taxes, and calling himself Messiah, a king (Lk 23:2). Pilate finds him innocent of the charges; Herod’s interrogation is inconclusive because Jesus doesn’t answer his questions. The second criminal also pronounces him condemned unjustly and the centurion says as Jesus dies, “Certainly this man was innocent.”

Jesus’ innocence and his forgiveness of those who crucified him in spite of that innocence is central to the story. Luke will draw on that same theme in Acts when the first martyr, Stephen, asks God to forgive those who stone him.

Many contemporary Christians and those who struggle with Christianity wrestle with the meaning of the cross, with the doctrine of atonement, and especially with the notion that Jesus had to die for our sins. As hard as it is for us to get our heads around this notion, it may be that Luke’s understanding of the cross is still more puzzling–an innocent victim who prays for forgiveness: that’s an image of a God of great compassion, and of a Christ who is difficult to imitate. But forgiveness of others is at the heart of our faith (Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us) and should also be at the heart of our ethics

An Anointing of Abundance: A Sermon for the Fifth Sunday in Lent, 2013

I’m tired of winter. I’m particularly tired of the weather we’ve been having the past few days or weeks—a little snow, rain, freezing rain, gray days. Gray. The snow piles that remain on the side of the streets and sidewalks are grimy. Where the snow has melted, we see all of the trash that’s accumulated over the last months, and the mud, and the dead vegetation. To make matters worse, did you know that the high temperature in Madison on March 17, 2012 was 80 degrees? It’s all very depressing. Continue reading

Early reflections on the new pope

The selection of Cardinal Bergoglio as pope set off a flurry of speculation. His opposition to Argentina’s legalization of gay marriage and his role in the “dirty war” came under close scrutiny. How he will negotiate the curia, the crises facing Roman Catholicism, and everything else he has to be and do remains to be seen. But one thing has become clear. He is going to be a different kind of pope. Much has been made of his actions in the first few days of his papacy–returning with the other cardinals on the bus, paying his own hotel bill, wearing his own black shoes rather than the red shoes favored by his predecessors. He has dressed simply, refused to accept many of the symbols of his office, and sought to remain accessible to the people.

No doubt he will disappoint many Catholics and many others who want radical reform in the church. But reform can take many forms. His choice of the name Francis suggests that he will seek to make the church relevant to the lives of ordinary men and women across the world. If he is successful in doing so, not only will that mean a very different church, in the long run, it may also have a profound impact on the Church’s doctrine and practice.

From Reuters:

Pope Francis, giving his clearest indication yet that he wants a more austere Catholic Church, said on Saturday that it should be poor and remember that its mission is to serve the poor.

Is the new pope a reformer? From Phil Lawler at catholicculture.org:

To grasp the full significance of this new Pope’s chosen name, consider this: For 1,100 years, every newly elected Pontiff had chosen a name that had been used by some other Pope before him. Since Pope Lando, who ruled from 913 to 914, every Pontiff on the historical records has a Roman numeral after his name, and the only Pontiff who chose a new name, John Paul I, explicitly said that he was taking the names of the two Popes before him, John XXIII and Paul VI. So when he chose an entirely new name, Pope Francis showed that he was prepared to strike out in a new direction.

James Martin, SJ on the significance of a Jesuit pope

From John Haldane at First Things:

Having held the papacy for most of its history, and watched it go first to a Pole and then to a German, the Italians wanted it back; but they had the problem that much of the recent trouble suffered by the Catholic Church is seen to have arisen, or at least not to have been properly managed, within the Vatican which they dominate. On that account the tide turned against them, but it could have reversed had there been no prospect of timely agreement on a figure from elsewhere.

Another non-Italian European was always unlikely in part because Western Europe is seen to be the site of greatest secularization, and no European cardinal has shown much capacity for dealing with that. At the same time a North American would have been unpalatable to Europeans who dislike the USA’s global power. It was too early for an African or Asian, and so an Italo-South American, with a clean record, high intelligence, evident virtue, and pastoral commitment, who also knows (but is not enamored of) the Vatican, evidently commanded wide-support.

From Simon Barrow (Ekklesia)

Much of what can initially be said of this man may be summed up in the style of the Society of Jesus, which formed the new pope. At the centre of Jesuit life is a combination of the ‘Spiritual Exercises’ set in motion by its founder, Ignatius of Loyola, and a concern to engage the world through learning, culture, social justice, service and ecumenical dialogue.

Jesuits do not have an official habit, but in the Constitutions of the Society, declare: “The clothing too should have three characteristics: first, it should be proper; second, conformed to the usage of the country of residence; and third, not contradictory to the poverty we profess…”.

A collection of reflections from across the world compiled by the Australian Broadcasting Company

John Allen’s analysis of the conclave

Peter Brown’s “Through the Eye of a Needle” and twenty-first century Christianity

I’ve been reading Peter Brown’s immense and marvelous Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, The Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West 350-550. It’s a magisterial examination of the transformation of Rome and of Christianity in those two centuries, looking at those transformation through the lens of attitudes toward wealth and the poor. The standard account of the rise of Christianity focuses on the conversion of Constantine and sees a rapid move from paganism to Christianity and an equally rapid and thorough transformation of the pagan aristocracy into the hierarchy of the Christian church.

Brown tells a much more complex tale of a slow conversion to Christianity picking up speed in the late fourth century. But even so the tug of paganism remained and aristocratic Christians continued to put on games and donate to secular causes well into the fifth century. The same is true of wealth as those who converted to Christianity and sought to donate their wealth to the church were challenged by family members who saw this as a threat to the family. Interestingly, because legally it was difficult to leave legacies to corporate bodies or institutions, wealthy Christians had to name the local bishop in their wills.

Brown ranges far and wide in his study. He looks closely at Jerome and Rome, at Ambrose and Milan, and Augustine of Hippo. But he also pays close attention to Paulinus of Nola. Importantly, he offers a vivid picture of life in the country villas of Gaul and Spain.

There is much to commend this work as scholarship, but I couldn’t help but reflect on its significance for helping us think about Christianity in the twenty-first century. The fourth century has remained fascinating to Christians and it has re-emerged as something of a battleground among competing versions of twenty-first century Christianity. One of the most powerful narratives at work is the idea of the “Constantinian fall of the Church” that’s recently been challenged by Peter Leithart.

As we move to what many call a post-Christian society, many look back to the pre-Constantinian church for guidance, a church that wasn’t in power. Brown problematizes the idea that suddenly with Constantine the church became the center of political and economic power. The story he tells is much more complex. He shows conflict between clergy and laity, especially lay people who resisted conforming simply to certain standards of Christianity. But he also points out that in the sixth century, the main force trying to set the clergy apart as a separate caste (special dress, tonsure, continence) came from the laity, not the clergy. Brown shows for the fourth and even into the fifth century, many lay people tried to negotiate between competing versions of Christianity, and also tried to remain true to the traditions of Roman civic religion and of their families.

One of the dangers of contemporary Christianity is to revert to a sectarianism. There is seductive appeal in the image of a gathered church following Jesus Christ closely in a hostile world. That image fuels much of the rhetoric of the religious right, but it also drives Anabaptism and neo-Anabaptism. Even mainline congregations in the midst of a different narrative of decline, might find such an image attractive. But the story Brown tells is of different visions of Christianity competing in the fourth and fifth centuries. Importantly, his evidence that the emperors did not lavish wealth on the church until very late in the fourth century is absolutely convincing. The Christianity that emerged in the fifth and sixth centuries did not succeed primarily because it had the power of the empire behind it, but because it was best adapted to the changing historical circumstances. And even then (as now), the institutional church, the clergy and hierarchy, had limited power to shape the faith and practice of ordinary Christians.

Whether or not we are facing the same magnitude of cultural shift in the twenty-first century that late Antiquity experienced is not clear. Certainly Christianity is facing a context it has not encountered before. Brown’s book is an important reminder that history is much more complex than we often assume, and that the future may turn out very different than anyone could imagine. He also shows the creative ability of Christianity to adapt to rapidly changing circumstances.

G.W. Bowersock’s glowing and thorough review is here.

 

Pope Francis I

The news has broken that Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio of Buenos Aires, Argentina has been elected Pope. A Jesuit, he has taken the name of Francis I, no doubt a nod to the Franciscan tradition. He was in contention in 2005 when Pope Benedict XVI was elected and is now 76 years old.

The current take is that he straddles the divide between liberals and conservatives in the church. He has a passion for social justice but is staunchly conservative on sexual matters. As an Argentinian, his election is a symbol of the global shift in the Roman Catholic Church away from Europe.

more here: (from John Allen).

Watching the opening of the conclave with the sound turned off

I watch very little TV and the only time I watch the cable news channels is if the treadmill I select at the gym is underneath a TV turned to one of those channels. Even then, I don’t hear what the pundits and reporters are saying because my earbuds are firmly fixed and I’m either listening to music of my choice or a podcast (often that of workingpreacher.org).

This morning CNN was showing the mass and the procession of the cardinals into the Sistine Chapel. As liturgical processions often are, it was impressive. And as those of us interested in such matters usually do, I noticed the variety of vestments. Some cardinals were wearing elaborate lace cottas; others had more simple garb. I spied one that looked very much like my own. As is often the case in liturgical processions, the camera caught the hand of a bishop (? he was in a purple cassock) stretching up to rearrange the stole of the cardinal in front of him.

Such processions are intended to convey the majesty and power of the Church. That’s true whether it’s a procession of cardinals or a more simple procession at a parish Eucharist. This one did so. As the cardinals moved from the baroque splendor of St. Peter’s to the Renaissance beauty of the Sistine Chapel with its frescoes by Michelangelo, the images sent around the world were meant to signal to all of us the power, majesty, and endurance of the Roman Catholic Church.

The symbolism, or intended symbolism, of the cardinals’ procession this morning, with all of its pomp, its appeal to historical precedent, and frankly its nostalgia, seems rather hollow in the face of the crises facing the Roman Catholic Church and religion in general in the west. I was struck by the narrow demographic reality of those who will elect the pope, the ostensible head of a church with over a billion members. 115 cardinal electors, all of them male of course, the majority European. Their average age (almost 72 years old) is slightly above that of the conclave that elected Pope Benedict XVI in 2005. Remarkably, that’s above the average age of the group that elected John Paul II in 1978 (67). The youngest is 53: Baselios Cleemis Thottunkal of India. 58% of them were named by Pope Benedict XVI. 35% are members of, or retired from, the papal curia (24% in 2005) They are not representative of the world-wide church; but then they are not meant to be. More on the numbers here or here.

Writers for the National Catholic Reporter have this to say about current speculation concerning which cardinals have the inside track:

Many here, following lead of the Italian press, are calling this “a race with four horses.” Scola is said to be in post position, with Canadian Cardinal Marc Ouellet, Brazilian Cardinal Pedro Odilo Scherer and at least one American following.

New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan seems to be gaining supporters, the Italian newspapers say, but Washington Cardinal Donald Wuerl is a possible compromise candidate should the cardinals be unable to find a pope in the first few rounds of balloting.

The Vatican bureaucracy, known as the Roman Curia, has been the subject of sustained criticism in the 10 meetings, or general congregations, the cardinals have met in over the last week.

The Internet, and especially social media, have dramatically altered the conclave, or at least the world’s experience of it. The difference from 2005 is remarkable. My twitter feed is full of jokes, links to commentary, and comments about the election. There is intense interest in it, even among those of us who are not Roman Catholic. On one level, I suspect that interest is generated by the appeal of contests–whether they be elections or sporting events.

And we might wonder with Garry Wills whether the next pope even matters. Sure, he might be able to make changes in papal bureaucracy; if he’s a miracle worker, he might find a way through the sexual abuse crisis. But can a pope do anything about the increasing secularism of the West and increasing religious conflict elsewhere in the world? We are in an age of globalization but there are also powerful centrifugal forces at work (just ask the Anglican Communion). Will the Roman Catholic Church be any more successful in negotiating among the crises and the cultural forces that are challenging it? Can the head of a hierarchy increasingly isolated from the daily lives and concerns of the vast majority of humanity offer the good news of Jesus Christ in words that connect with them and their experience?

Watching the procession from St. Peter’s to the Sistine Chapel with the sound off may be an apt metaphor for the ultimate significance of what’s taking place in the conclave today and in the days to come.

A Man and his Two Sons: A Sermon for the 4th Sunday in Lent

The parable of the prodigal son, the gospel reading we just heard, is probably one of the two or three most familiar of all Jesus’ parables. Most of you have heard the story many times before—in sermons or in Sunday School. It’s so familiar and so beloved because it conveys to us an appealing image of a loving and forgiving God, an image that comforts and reassures us. As familiar as the story is, it is told with drama and detail that draws us in, inviting us to enter into it and to identify with one, or perhaps more, of the characters. So I’m going to invite you to reflect for a moment on which character you most identify with. Turn to your neighbor, introduce yourself if you don’t know each other, and share with each other where you find yourself in this story—does the situation of the older son, younger son, or father most resonate with you at this time of your life? And why is that the case?

 

This rich parable invites us to do what we’ve just done, to enter into it to put ourselves in it. When we do so, we begin to connect the deep emotions of each character with emotions we’ve experienced in the past, or perhaps are experiencing right now—feelings of repentance, resentment, joy and love. But now I’d like to shift gears a bit, inviting you to hold on to that exploration of your emotions and the emotions of the characters and look at the parable’s larger context.

Luke wants us to read the story in a particular way. The lectionary signals his desire to us by including the very first verses of chapter 15 that tell us about the Pharisees’ complaint that Jesus hangs out with tax collectors and sinners. Luke follows those verses with two other familiar parables before giving us the one we know as “The Prodigal Son.” Those are stories are the one about the shepherd with 100 sheep who loses one, and the woman with ten coins who lost one. So the set up, by the time the reader gets to today’s parable is clear: rejoicing upon finding that which was lost.

The other pieces of information that may help throw light on our parable are a couple of things about ancient culture. First, the idea that a father might give his son part of his inheritance, while not illegal was unheard of. One’s property was disposed of only at death, and for a child to demand his share of it before his father’s death is sort of like telling your father, “You’re dead to me.” Presumably, the property, in this case the land, would have been sold. It’s easy to imagine what both father and elder son thought whenever they passed by the property they had once owned and watched the new owners working it. It would probably also have meant loss of income.

In addition to all that, there’s what happens when the son “comes to himself.” He wastes his inheritance in dissolute living, ends up eating fodder meant for pigs, basically living with the pigs, and finally decides he’s had enough of it. He composes a speech that he hopes will, if not restore him in his father’s good graces, at least ensure him of a better life and half-decent food. He heads home tail between his legs. He is probably ashamed and embarrassed and he expects to be shamed further when he arrives back home.

In her commentary on the text, Alyce McKenzie points out that Roman Palestine village culture was a culture based on honor and shame. By his behavior, the son had brought shame on both himself and his family. Apparently, villages performed a shame ceremony when a villager returned after having left the community for the gentile world, or married a gentile woman. Upon his return, the whole village would gather around him, breaking jars with nuts or other items and declare publicly that he was cut off from the rest of the village. It was an act of public shame and shunning.

But the father’s behavior prevented that ritual of shame. By running out to greet his son, he prevented them from performing that ritual. Even more, he welcomed him back into his own bosom and the bosom of his household. There’s a sense in which the father’s actions are themselves shameful. Respectable men didn’t behave that way in public. They didn’t display affection in that way; they certainly didn’t kiss a son publicly. He’s acting more like a mother than a father, and his behavior is inappropriate. By allowing himself to be humiliated, he stopped the village from humiliating his son.

 

I’d like to go back to the question I asked you a few minutes ago. Then, it was, “With whom do you most identify in this story?” There are other ways of asking the questions, other questions that the story raises—one is, “with whom ought you identify in the story?” That is to say, where does the story challenge your understanding of yourself and God? It’s easy for us to put ourselves in the role of the younger son. Perhaps we don’t see ourselves as quite as awful a human being as he was. We might not offend our parents as deeply, sin as much, fall into as abject and dissolute life as him. But nonetheless, it’s easy to see something of ourselves in him. Having sinned, we are penitent and seek the forgiveness of a loving God.

But the parable doesn’t let us stay there. It challenges us to see us in those other roles, the roles of elder son or father. If we’re honest with our selves, how often is it the case that we act like the older son? Whether within our own families or at work or school, how often do we resent what seems to be the favored, and undeserved, treatment of someone else? How often do we feel as if we’re the older brother who finds out about the party only after it’s well underway? Do the father’s words offer any consolation to us when we feel slighted or underappreciated?

That’s one challenge the parable presents to us. But there’s an even more difficult one. Think of the father again. The story began with his younger son demanding his inheritance, treating him as if he were dead, jeopardizing his family’s financial security. Now he returns after squandering his inheritance, after years of hard living. He returns with a rehearsed speech on his lips, and the father runs to greet him, inviting more of the community’s humiliation. He pays no attention to past grievances or feelings of moral superiority; he embraces, kisses, invites his son back home and rejoices at his return.

If this parable invites us to imagine our selves in the places of its characters, where might we need to find our selves in the role of the father? Where might we need to offer the joy of forgiveness to someone we encounter in our daily life? Who might we encounter who is in as deep need of forgiveness and love as the younger son in this parable? To offer that forgiveness, to offer the joy of God’s love to someone who feels unable to receive it on their own, may be the greatest gift we can give and is certainly one way to share the good news of Jesus Christ.

 

Kathleen Norris’ lecture at the Frederick Buechner Center

“So what” is an essential question for people of faith: what does it matter that we worship, or meditate, or chant sutras? Another way of looking at that question — one that any church congregation could ask itself — is what would we, our neighborhood, our society miss if we weren’t here — we crazy people who choose to act as if God does indeed exist? The rector of my church in Honolulu asked that question of our congregation several years ago, and it moved us to expand our ministries in ways we could never have foreseen. We now offer free-wi-fi to the neighborhood; and host a weekly farmer’s market. We added a hot lunch to our monthly grocery give-away, giving our many elderly neighbors who come a rare chance to socialize.

But sometimes just the presence of a church — a space for something as useless and marvelous as worship — can be a powerful witness. Last year a woman staggered into our church office — she’d had a bad fight with her boyfriend, and had taken an overdose of barbiturates. She’d left their apartment, and after wandering for a bit, was headed to a park where she might curl up under a tree and die. We’re across the street from that park; and the woman told the church secretary that when she saw the church she realized that she wanted to live. Tell that story the next time an atheist tries to tell you that churches serve no purpose; or a misguided and bitter poet says that religious language is a dead language.

via Frederick Buechner Center.

 

Another homeless victim of our medical care

I’ve decided that at this point, besides the conversations that are taking place about making a medical shelter a reality in Madison, all I can do about this aspect of homelessness is to continue to blog about it.

A guy showed up at our doors around 4:00 this afternoon. This is his story. He’d been released from Meriter Hospital earlier in the day and sent to the VA. They sent him on to the Men’s Drop-In Shelter at Grace, telling him that he would be able to get in at 4:30 pm. Wrong. To be blunt, they don’t even have basic information about shelter hours. One wonders whether they lack other information that might have provided a more comfortable room for him tonight.

Our staff had brought him into the warm to wait and rest. He was weak, barely able to stand, let alone walk. How will he fare overnight? What will happen for him tomorrow? Does anyone in the VA, Madison’s hospitals or medical community, or even the homeless agencies care enough to try to address the larger issues? I’m not sure I can bear witnessing another episode like this.

As I have written about repeatedly on this blog, incidents like this take place more often than anyone in our county or city government know. They take place more often than I know. I learn about them only when I encounter someone like this man who has been released directly from a hospital to the shelter, and arrives before the shelter opens. What I do know is the pain and suffering in all those who have had to make the transition from a hospital bed to the homeless shelter. I also am well aware of my bleeding heart. Does anyone else’s heart bleed?